[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <268b05c1-846e-c229-277c-140c13fc87dc@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 1 Jan 2022 00:15:25 +0800
From: Hangyu Hua <hbh25y@...il.com>
To: Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>
Cc: balbi@...nel.org, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, axboe@...nel.dk,
jj251510319013@...il.com, dan.carpenter@...cle.com,
linux-usb@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] usb: gadget: clear related members when goto fail
I get that. I will fix and resubmit my patch.
Thanks again.
On 2021/12/31 下午11:57, Alan Stern wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 31, 2021 at 10:31:51AM +0800, Hangyu Hua wrote:
>> On 2021/12/31 上午3:46, Alan Stern wrote:
>
>>>> @@ -1892,7 +1895,12 @@ dev_config (struct file *fd, const char __user *buf, size_t len, loff_t *ptr)
>>>> }
>>>> return value;
>>>>
>>>> +fail2:
>>>> + dev->dev = NULL;
>>>> +fail1:
>>>> + dev->hs_config = NULL;
>>>
>>> It is not necessary to have all these different statement labels. You
>>> can simply have "fail:" clear all three pointers.
>
>> I don't think so. It is not necessary to clean all three pointers if
>> some of them aren't kbuf. I think it may be better to keep their own
>> pointers.
>
> If the pointers aren't set to a region inside kbuf then they are
> meaningless. There is no reason to keep the old values. It is better
> to avoid multiple unnecessary statement labels.
>
> Alan Stern
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists